MR Design Philosophy; Henry Fowler, ex-42424 - New Build Fowler Tank

Thank you.

Track occupation then and now aren't directly comparable: in those days most of the traffic was goods - slow, unfitted and heavy trains ambling around the system, generally at 20 - 30 mph. The amount of goods traffic then is difficult to visualise today.

 

Regarding the 4F, it is interesting that a batch of 45 locos were constructed as late as 1941. According to an article that I read a few years ago in Steam Bonehead, Stanier had a major wobble and was angered beyond measure when these engines were ordered. Of course, this was nonsense, he would have suggested a more modern alternative, but, with the then state of the nation and the ongoing emergency, a quick and cheap delivery would have been the main priority, which he would have signed-off without a hint of egotistical tantrums.

Cheers

Alan

 

Agreed. The 4F gets a lot of bad press, not all of it deserved. They did a lot of good work over the years; they were good but not exceptional engines. It proved remarkably difficult to design a decent replacement, however, and things had to wait until Ivatt's Class 4 hit the rails.

 

I wonder why it was so difficult though - the GWR designed the 43xx and the SECR the N class, both in pre-grouping times, due to freight loads proving beyond the capability of Victorian / Edwardian 0-6-0s, so one wonders why it took a generation longer before the LMS had anything comparable in the Ivatt class 4s? Perhaps a native conservatism made it easier to justify, on tooling and other production grounds, keep churning out the same increasingly obsolete designs, rather than take the leap of faith into producing something more modern?

Tom

 

I think the problem was weight. One idea was to remove the tanks, bunker and bogie from a 2-6-4 tank, but the idea was rejected as it was over the weight limit.

 

The reasons were probably simplicity and 100% adhesion. The LNWR were (within the LMS fold) masters of the 0-8-0 but when the LMS built 0-8-0s they were more like enlarged Fowler 4Fs, and were not as highly regarded as the LNWR types. One must also remember that, whilst regarded as goods locomotives the 4Fs had 5'3'' wheels and could run faster than any of the 0-8-0s. I once had one on an excursion from Derby to Blackpool via the Midland line through the Peak. I can't remember the load, probably not more than seven, but it had no difficulty. One just accepted that this was a 55mph service!

 

Although some folk must have realised they were not in for a very high speed run when they were sometimes used on the S&D Bournemouth Rapide service!

Dave

 

Think this spoonfed wisdom could be 'under review' lets face it the GWR had got it right with the Castle but you could argue it was their ultimate design perhaps engineering evolves when there is discourse and a need such as the WCML. The Prince of Wales and Claughtons are grossly underestimated as bloody good engines

 

The Claughtons were good looking; but if they had been "bloody good" the LMS would hardly have tried the various modifications, including larger boilers and Caprotti valves, and then eventually given up and pretended to rebuild them as Patriots.

 

The problems of the Claughtons were twofold: very high coal consumption; and mechanical weaknesses, especially to the trailing coupled axleboxes.

The attempts to reduce the coal consumption were many and varied, including the fitting of new cylinders with Capprotti gear - which worked. The answer was found by examinging the coal cosumption of the Royal Scots, which would rise by no less than 80% between works visits. It was found to be wear to the very solid and inflexible single Schmidt valve rings, which were replaced along with the valve heads, first by four and later six narrow rings. This solved the problem, and was a modification also carried out on the Claughtons, which had the same Schmidt rings. The result was the same, and coal consumption reduced to a level, still a little above that of a Stanier engine, but about average for a loco of its vintage. The expensive Capprotti conversion had been unnecessary.

A second modification was the provision of larger boilers, more in line with what C.J. Bowen Cook had wanted, but vetoed by the then Civil Engineer. Again, these improved performance, but merely brought it up to what was originally intended.

Alas, the story of attemts to improve reliability and reduce maintenance costs was far less happy, and never really successful. It might have proved capable of solution, but LNWR types were not in favour under the Midland dominated regime then in power, and from 1934 Stanier types were, in any case, flooding the market, so the class was withdrawn.

I'll admit that "bloody good" is probably an over-optimistic appraisal of the Claughtons, but they were capable of good work and were the mainstay of WCML expresses until the arrival of the Scots. As one commentator put it, they were a near miss rather than a bad engine, and deserve better than the reputation they were tarnished with.

 

I agree, the Claughtons were very much a near miss. Certainly some of the problems including the piston rings might well have been sorted out if it hadn't been for Bowen-Cookes untimely death. Many of the defects were generic to most LNWR express classes but a lot was expected of the Claughtons. I believe Hughes and Cox were found to have manipulated trials results against the Claughtons, perhaps an anti LNWR prejudice but equally because they didn't want to perpetuate a design with so many problems to sort out. Regarding economy I'm sure I read somewhere that, long after their day had passed, a Claughton with iron piston rings exceeded the performance of a Castle.

 

It's maybe worth mentioning that it was the large boiler from the Claughton that was perpetuated with the Patriots, so come 2017, a rather large Claughton component will be resurrected.

Also, in line with the discussion concerning the steaming performance of the Jubilees on another thread, initial tests to compare a Jubilee and a Patriot in 1934 came out in favour of the Patriot, which does give some credence to the potential of the large-boilered Claughton; a great pity that they were swept away so soon.

Cheers

Alan

 

So ---- when's someone going to start a new build sorted-out Claughton?

 

So ---- when's someone going to start a new build sorted-out Claughton?
They are its called a Patriot.
And a sorted out Prince of Wales is called a Black 5